Corte Constitucional de la República de Colombia

 The court reviewed a decision made by the ‘Family Commissioner’ (Comisario de Familia) and endorsed by the Family Judge (Juzgado de Familia), denying the plaintiff’s request for precautionary measures against the defendant, based on physical and psychological aggressions. The Commissioner estimated that there was not enough evidence as to affirm that the risk to the plaintiff’s life or integrity. Given the parties’ mutual aggression, the Commissioner advised the couple to cease all acts of violence against each other.

The case concerned women’s sexual and reproductive rights, specifically the right to voluntarily terminate the pregnancy. The court ruled that sexual and reproductive rights, including abortion in certain circumstances, are subject to constitutional protection. A pregnant woman’s husband requested that the health care provider perform a genetic and pathological test on the fetus and the termination of his wife’s pregnancy, based on an alleged diagnosis of malformation, among other complications. The doctor refused upon conscientious objection.

(Sentencia T-274-15 - Acción de Tutela; Expedientes acumulados: T-4.492.963; T-4.715.291; T-4.725.592; T-4.734.867)

The case concerned issues of language in judicial rulings that led to revictimization. The protected applicant, the leader of an association of peasant women, was kidnapped and raped by an illegal armed group that considered her a threat. The plaintiff brought suit against two potential perpetrators who were acquitted by the court of Cundinamarca. The Constitutional Court ruled to exclude a section of the aforementioned decision because of the section’s use of vulgar and disqualifying expressions in relation to the victim of sexual violence.

This case concerned women’s equality in public-sector employment. The court ruled in favor of gender quotas for positions of public power. The plenary of the court reviewed a statutory project regulating the effective participation of women in public institutions by the establishment of gender quotas. A minimum of 30% of the top decision-making positions, among other senior positions in public Colombian institutions, shall be held by women. Sanctions were established for those appointing authorities that would not comply with the rule.

This judicial review concerned the issue of women’s military service. The court ruled that limits on the activities that women can perform during voluntary military service were unconstitutional, because they violated women’s constitutional right to be treated equally. The law stated that women in the military could only engage in assistant, administrative, or cultural tasks. The Court indicated that such limitations were based on stereotypes that imply that women are not suitable for other military activities.

This judicial review concerned domestic violence. The court ruled that there ought to be greater criminal sanctions for domestic violence offenses. The law provides for four to eight years of imprisonment in cases of domestic violence, irrespective of the magnitude of the injuries. The plaintiff claimed that the article went against the proportionality principle set forth by the Colombian Constitution.

The case concerned abortion, the right to life, the right to health, and the right to self-determination. The court ruled for the partial decriminalization of abortion and set circumstances under which voluntary termination of pregnancy would be permissible. The Criminal Code previously criminalized voluntary abortion with one to three years of imprisonment.

This case concerned issues of personal freedom and the discrimination against sex workers. The ruling resulted in the protection of two sex workers’ fundamental rights: to be treated equally and not be discriminated because of their profession. The events that triggered such protection concerned a police raid against sex workers in Bogotá under the excuse of regaining a public space.

The case concerned labor rights and protection of sex workers. The plaintiff, a sex worker, sued her former employer for firing her after she became pregnant. Under articles 236 and 239 of the Colombian Labor Code, a pregnant woman is subject to special labor protection, and therefore cannot be fired without cause and without authorities’ permission. The court consisdered whether pregnant sex workers should have the same labor protection as other professions.